Bigoted community on your instance

Calm down people. It is deleted.

Edit: they can repeal this decision. If they remove that line from their rules and live by it we are up to having normal conversations even if we don't agree with the viewpoints.

But our stance on LGBQT is clearly laid out in the instance rules. We want to provide an inclusive platform. There are enough LGBTQ people who are christians.

EDIT: The community's moderator/owner hasn't been online in over a month. If anyone wants to take over this community and make it follow the Lemmy World rules then contact me.

Sometimes I think you guys are really managing dumpsters on fire
- Such is internet janitor duty. Doesn't help they're both janitors, tech support, and management, I imagine it's quite the handful.

To play devil's advocate (pun not intended), this community poses an interesting quandary.

When seen in context, their rules do clearly prohibit any hate speech against the LGBTQ+ community:

Rule #5: Remember that we are all fellow image-bearers. We may disagree with people, but we are never to tear down another person’s inherent dignity and value as someone made in the image of God (Imago Dei). This includes those in the LGBTQ+ community. They need Jesus, too, just like we do, and we can’t say we represent Him while we tear down the works of His hands.

Rule #6: Banned subjects include ... Anything calling for direct/indirect violence against any individual or group, including LGBTQ+ individuals or groups; ...

Rule #8: This community does not affirm practiced LGBTQ+ lifestyles, with the exception of the ace/aroace (asexual/aromatic-asexual) lifestyle in certain contexts. However, abuse towards members of the LGBTQ+ community will not be tolerated. Pro-LGBTQ+ content is not allowed; however, sincere questions and discourse about LGTBQ+issues are permitted.

I'd be interested to see the admin's ruling in this case.

That's the ol' "hate the sin love the sinner" shtick. It tries to separate homosexuality (the "sin") from homosexuals (the "sinner"). If only they could stop sinning (stop being gay) they would of course be welcome!

Its not just excluding them from church/christian communities, its the theological basis for conversion camps and the like.
Mmm aromatic asexual
I would think specifically not allowing "pro-LGBTQ+ content" is being pretty bigoted. Just because it is a religious belief does not mean it can't also be bigoted.

~~If this little "loophole" is enough to allow this kind of thing to stay on this instance, I would be worried. But I'll wait and see what the admins have to say about it.~~ Resolved: https://lemmy.world/comment/1455537
- I think that would depend on what "Pro-LGBTQ+ content" means. It's quite a vague term. Does it refer to posts, discussion topics, or what?
  
  They do follow up by saying that serious discussion about LGBTQ+ issues is acceptable, so the fact that are open to discussion, in theory, could be a point in their defense.
Thanks for posting their rules. Very helpful and informative
- I'm just here to find out what flavour an aromatic-asexual is
I was going to say something pretty similar to what you were.

I'm the last one to generally defend religious people, but are they actually being bigoted?

There's a pretty large difference between not affirming something and attacking something and frankly flipping through the community I didn't see either of those things occurring.

It sounds like the original poster just doesn't like the rule itself.
- What if it was race? What if they said “this community doesn’t affirm black lifestyles.”
- Pro-LGBTQ+ content is not allowed
  
  That sounds pretty intolerant to me. How else do you define a bigot?

I think we can tag in the Paradox of Tolerance with a side of Nazi Bar on this one.

This type of "they're intolerant, but polite" shit needs to get nipped in the bud because it metastasizes quickly, and sends out a batsignal to other intolerant groups that this will make a fine home base so long as they hide their power levels.

This type of “they’re intolerant, but polite” shit needs to get nipped in the bud because it metastasizes quickly

Not only that, if there's a rule about politeness but intolerant people are welcome, the politeness rule becomes a "don't sass the nazis" rule.
Intolerant but polite is a great description of sea lioning.
Hating on LGBTQ like Jesus would have wanted 🙏🫶
Cool. But why don't we do it proactively? Like let's go find these people that think the Bad Things. We can even wear matching shirts - I'll go order them. Come on guys. We cannot rest while there are Bad Thoughts out there being thought by Bad People.
- Oh look. It's the "RVO" portion of DARVO.

Being LGBT is not a lifestyle... omg

That in itself is overstepping what Christianity is about. At the core, you only need to believe a few things:

Jesus is God
God is Triune
Baptism unites us as Christians

Everything else varies from one denomination to another. Also, if you're going to put any restriction on /c/christians are you also going to going to apply this equally to other communities of similar faiths like /c/jews /c/muslims? The belief systems are very connected to the Old Testament teachings, where most of the discussion on this topic stems from in theological terms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_affirming_LGBT_people

At the heart of Christian teaching is love. Following a personal conviction of self-applied beliefs because you think God's vocations are more important than your brain chemistry is just that: Personal. It should never spill over to anyone unwilling to follow such a path, especially in a way that is hateful. I think as long as participants understand that line in the sand is a line in stone and it is carefully moderated, then it should be fine. There's literally millions of other topics that could be discussed.

Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: [email protected]

Go away bot, I know what I'm doing. I have zero desire to make it easier for people to access the community
- Well that's just being paternalistic. And arbitrary; you DID provide a link, you're not hiding anything, you're just being kind of weird about it.

Did you read the whole rule list? It seems that you intentionally cropped that part out of context.

Its not nice to target communities by making this kind of posts and invite brigadeering on them just because you disagree with them.

I agree with you and it's sad to see you're being downvoted for stating something that should be obvious.

I don't like religions in general because I find them incoherent on many aspects, but that's not a good reason to attack them, they're not breaking rules, just ignore them.
- Well, I am disappointed that the mods took the decision so easily. This community should maybe revise slightly the rules, but there was no clear violation, it could be resolved with discussion.
  
  And there I was expecting Lemmy to enable bigger freedom of opinion than reddit, I guess I was wrong. Seriously considering to stop using both networks.
Could you elaborate what exactly it is that makes that particular rule acceptable in context?
- Because not every topic is relevant to every community?

@[email protected] 6 hours

Oh this is cool. Let me try.

@[email protected] 2 hours
- Hey, here is your reminder!
- Gotcha! I'll remind you at Wednesday, July 19, 2023, 8:42:09 AM UTC.
Gotcha! I'll remind you at Wednesday, July 19, 2023, 12:04:09 PM UTC.

Yes, "christians".

Can't believe I'm going to bat for the Christians but here I go: Maybe it's OK that not everyone thinks the same about every single issue and that we have some diversity of thought on the fucking internet.

Their rules also make it very clear that they're not going full Westborough. But even if they were, the Internet is not just for people who agree with me. This trend of orthodoxy is quite disheartening.

We don't need to pull the marketplace of ideas thing when the "ideas" being defended are things like "I don't think LGBTQ+ people should exist / are sinners".
- aka the paradox of tolerance which isn’t a paradox but a treaty but people know the name “paradox of tolerance”. we’re in pretty good philosophical company on this one: slippery slope and “but free speech” arguments have clear counters
- That's exactly when we need it. It's OK that other people think differently on the Internet.
So they can go a little Westborough, as a treat.
- hah. Well yeah. A little Westborough is basically just mainstream Christian isn't it?
No one forced you to defend bigotry. That's something you chose to do.

Lemmy really has a bullshit attitude towards opinions.

Intolerance of other people's identity is not “opinions”

Same as saying the KKK has these “opinions” about black people

Can't believe y'all STILL haven't bothered to look up Popper's Paradox of Tolerance.
There is no such thing as "the one Lemmy". You don't like the state of things? Go found your own instance with black jack and hookers
- Or tabernacles and funny hats .. whichever is more appropriate
If you want "opinions" go check out 8Chan.

If you want something halfway decent, stay here.

Why not tell the mods to correct the rules if you don't like them, instead of just deleting the whole thing?

Why not just block the community and move on? Plenty of steps you can take it you don't like the content you're seeing